|
|
Post by saintjoeeric on Jun 2, 2008 0:24:12 GMT -5
Well it looks like you can exalt or smite a post, so that might be of a little help. So long as no trolls come over this way we should be fine.
|
|
|
|
Post by jbfrenchhorn on Jun 2, 2008 3:31:18 GMT -5
Mine is one of the no votes. Although I am a big boy, I think there are more constructive ways to refer to people. If you disagree with someone, explain why. Don't just blast the person with dirty language.
|
|
|
|
Post by jbfrenchhorn on Jun 2, 2008 3:33:44 GMT -5
Well it looks like you can exalt or smite a post, so that might be of a little help. So long as no trolls come over this way we should be fine. Does that exalt or smite the poster, not the post? I'm new here, so maybe I'm wrong. But I got the impression that that goes onto the person's record, not the post's. There are people around who are more knowledgeable than me though, and people who have been here longer than an hour. |
|
|
|
Post by ferrous on Jun 2, 2008 9:12:21 GMT -5
I find the idea of banning certain words somewhat troubling.
Was Orwell right when he invented “doublethink” and now “newspeak?”
[The basic idea behind Newspeak is to remove all shades of meaning from language, leaving simple dichotomies (pleasure and pain, happiness and sadness, good thoughts and thoughtcrimes) which reinforce the total dominance of the State. Similarly, Newspeak root words served as both nouns and verbs, which allowed further reduction in the total number of words; for example, "think" served as both noun and verb, so the word "thought" was not required and could be abolished. A staccato rhythm of short syllables was also a goal, further reducing the need for deep thinking about language. Successful Newspeak meant that there would be fewer and fewer words -- dictionaries would get thinner and thinner.
In addition, words with opposite meanings were removed as redundant, so "bad" became "ungood". Words with comparative and superlative meanings were also simplified, so "better" became "gooder", and "best" likewise became "goodest". Intensifiers could be added, so "great" became "plusgood", and "excellent" or "splendid" likewise became "doubleplusgood". Adjectives were formed by adding the suffix "-ful" to a root word (e.g., "goodthinkful", orthodox in thought), and adverbs by adding "-wise" ("goodthinkwise", in an orthodox manner). In this manner, as many words as possible were removed from the language. The ultimate aim of Newspeak was to reduce even the dichotomies to a single word that was a "yes" of some sort: an obedient word with which everyone answered affirmatively to what was asked of them.
“To control thought
“By 2050—earlier, probably—all real knowledge of Oldspeak will have disappeared. The whole literature of the past will have been destroyed. Chaucer, Shakespeare, Milton, Byron—they'll exist only in Newspeak versions, not merely changed into something different, but actually contradictory of what they used to be. Even the literature of the Party will change. Even the slogans will change. How could you have a slogan like "freedom is slavery" when the concept of freedom has been abolished? The whole climate of thought will be different. In fact there will be no thought, as we understand it now. Orthodoxy means not thinking—not needing to think. Orthodoxy is unconsciousness. ”
The underlying theory of Newspeak is that if something can't be said, then it can't be thought.
Examples of Newspeak, from the novel,
include: "crimethink"; "doubleplusungood"; and "Ingsoc" .They mean, respectively: "thought-crime"; "extremely bad"; and "English Socialism", the official political philosophy of the Party. The word "Newspeak" itself also comes from the language. Note that all of these words would be obsolete and should be removed in the "final" version of Newspeak, except for "doubleplusungood" in certain contexts.
Generically, Newspeak has come to mean any attempt to restrict disapproved language by a government or other powerful entity.”
Wow, powerful entity! Little did TNG realize, when starting this forum, that such things would come to pass.
|
|
|
|
Post by JustMyOpinion on Jun 2, 2008 12:06:01 GMT -5
I've been wondering how some of the PD posters (new forum) were able to use the "F" word repeatedly. Because they were not very nice persons. Now that the obvious has been stated  , how did they by pass the auto-censor? |
|
|
|
Post by ferrous on Jun 2, 2008 19:11:40 GMT -5
That was the point I was trying to make in a thread I started in the new PD forum.
I had the word Japan censored while I was able to use the word "f**k," in a contextual manner.
(Even in this forum, the auto censor tampered with the word)
At least the stars are a better improvement than the "not a very nice person" phrase inserted to replace when I write as-hole.
|
|
|
|
Post by The New Guy on Jun 2, 2008 19:29:36 GMT -5
ILittle did TNG realize, when starting this forum, that such things would come to pass. so true, so true. |
|
|
|
Post by ferrous on Jun 2, 2008 19:38:32 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by The New Guy on Jun 3, 2008 1:06:28 GMT -5
yeah, i remember when that came out. his seven words you can't say on television. unfortunately, only about 4 remain on the list now. (unless you consider cable where all 7 are frequently used)
|
|
|
|
Post by ferrous on Jun 3, 2008 8:22:10 GMT -5
I get a bad feeling when we have to talk about banning something.
Words don't insult people, people insult other people.
Guns don't kill people, people kill other people.
It's the responsible use of these things that separate the adults from the children and as-holes.
That's why books like Huckleberry Finn are being banned in our schools.
|
|
|
|
Post by Mink on Jun 6, 2008 19:26:57 GMT -5
not a very nice person.........testing, 1, 2, 3.......not a very nice person
edit: I guess the nays won!! Don't dispair now, we'll all live ;D
|
|
|
|
Post by JustMyOpinion on Jun 6, 2008 21:47:57 GMT -5
So, anyone know yet how karma points work (they're good I assume), or what the exalt/smite option is for?
|
|
, how did they by pass the auto-censor?
